DOCSLIB.ORG

Connecticut Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Deployment Transportation Strategy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Connecticut Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Deployment Transportation Strategy Connecticut Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Deployment Transportation Strategy 2011-2050 January 2011 Connecticut Center for Connecticut Department Advanced Technology, Inc. of Transportation 222 Pitkin Street, Suite 101 2800 Berlin Turnpike East Hartford, CT 06108 Newington, CT 06111 www.ccat.us www.ct.gov/dot/ This page intentionally left blank. The Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc. © 2010 2 Collaborative Participants Project Management and Plan Development: Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc.: Elliot Ginsberg – Chief Executive Officer Joel M. Rinebold – Program Director Connecticut Department of Transportation Other State Agencies Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development Connecticut Clean Energy Fund Connecticut Hydrogen - Fuel Cell Coalition General Motors Greater New Haven Transit District Proton Energy Systems Avalence, LLC AG/ENA FuelCell Energy Haynes Hydrogen Hydrogen Safety Precision Combustion Inc. UTC Power CTTransit Other Interested Stakeholders Renewable Energy Strategies, LLC 3 Table of Contents Foreword........................................................................................................................ 6 Foreword........................................................................................................................ 6 Executive Summary...................................................................................................... 7 Introduction............................................................................................................... 13 Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Vehicles .............................................................................. 15 Passenger Vehicles ................................................................................................... 15 Projected Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle Use.............................................................. 18 Commercial Vehicles ................................................................................................ 18 Infrastructure.............................................................................................................. 21 Highways................................................................................................................... 24 Station Locations and Fuel Demand......................................................................... 24 Refueling Station Projections ................................................................................... 27 Potential Hydrogen Fuel Benefits.............................................................................. 30 Air Pollution Impacts on Health............................................................................... 31 “Well To Wheel” Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................... 33 Energy Efficiency Impacts ........................................................................................ 34 Hydrogen Production, Storage, Delivery, and Cost ................................................ 36 Hydrogen Production................................................................................................ 36 Hydrogen Transportation and Storage..................................................................... 40 Hydrogen Refueling Station Infrastructure...........................................................................40 Connecticut Industry: Economic Assessment .......................................................... 42 Connecticut Refueling Station Projections ............................................................... 47 Connecticut Sales Projections .................................................................................. 48 Connecticut Employment Projections....................................................................... 48 Financing and Incentives............................................................................................ 48 State Funding............................................................................................................ 48 Federal Funding ....................................................................................................... 49 Traditional and Non-Traditional Funding Mechanisms for Transportation........................51 4 Index of Tables Table I - Fuel Cell Vehicle Summary Table..................................................................... 16 Table II – Projected Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle Use by 2050 ....................................... 18 Table III – Traffic Counts for Connecticut’s Interstate Highways................................... 24 Table IV– U.S. Refueling Station Projections.................................................................. 28 Table V - 2010 Hydrogen to Gasoline Comparison ($2010)............................................ 29 Table VI– National Ambient Air Quality Standards Chart .............................................. 30 Table VII - Transportation Emissions Comparison.......................................................... 33 Table VIII - Potential Annual Emission Reductions Using Hydrogen Fuel Cells ........... 33 Table IX– Energy Savings Using Hydrogen Fuel Cells ................................................... 35 Table X– Connecticut Hydrogen Companies ................................................................... 43 Table XI– U.S. Employment Projections ......................................................................... 46 Table XII - Connecticut Refueling Station Projections .................................................... 48 Table XIII – Summary of Non-Traditional Funding Mechanisms ................................... 54 Index of Figures Figure I– Connecticut’s Hydrogen Industry Employment................................................ 13 Figure II– Fuel Cell Powered Automobile Applications .................................................. 17 Figure III– CT Transit Fuel Cell Bus with UTC Fuel Cell Power Plant (left) and a Paratransit Vehicle (right)................................................................................................. 19 Figure IV– Hybrid Electric Fuel Cell Bus ........................................................................ 20 Figure V – State Owned Roadside Facilities in Connecticut............................................ 22 Figure VI– Potential Hydrogen Refueling Stations.......................................................... 23 Figure VII– Liquid Hydrogen Storage Facility – UTC Power, South Windsor, CT........ 25 Figure VIII – Proposed SunHydro Locations along an East Coast Hydrogen Highway.. 26 Figure IX– Hydrogen Refueling Station Infrastructure.................................................... 26 Figure X– Bass Diffusion Model – Market Penetration ................................................... 28 Figure XI– Fuel Cost per Mile of Hydrogen and Gasoline .............................................. 29 Figure XII– Hospitalizations in Connecticut .................................................................... 32 Figure XIII– Price per Patient in Connecticut .................................................................. 32 Figure XIV - Well to Wheel Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................. 34 Figure XV– Well to Wheels Petroleum Energy Use ........................................................ 35 Figure XVI– Proton’s FuelGen-65 (left) and Avālence’s Hydrofiller-50 (right)............. 37 Figure XVII– Hydrogen Refueling Station Cost .............................................................. 39 Figure XVIII– Hydrogen Refueling Station Costs per 1kg of Hydrogen......................... 39 5 Foreword As oil and other non-sustainable hydrocarbon energy resources become scarce, energy prices will increase and the reliability of supply will be reduced. The current economy in the United State is very dependent on hydrocarbon energy sources and any disruption or shortage of this energy supply will severely affect many energy related activities, including transportation. Governments are now investigating the use of hydrogen and renewable energy as a replacement of hydrocarbon fuels to reduce price volatility, improve reliability, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Connecticut is in a unique position to help address this problem as it is a world leader in research, design and manufacture of hydrogen fuel cell related technology. Through Public Act 09-186, Connecticut has provided legislative guidance to apply its knowledge and expertise in this field towards a transportation plan that will address refueling concerns as well as hydrogen powered vehicles with a main focus on mass transportation. In accordance with Public Act 09-186, Section 8, the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) and the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc. (CCAT) are pleased to submit to the joint standing committees of the General Assembly the following strategic plan titled: Connecticut Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Deployment Transportation Strategy: 2011-2050. Public Act 09-186, Section 8 states: “The Department of Transportation shall consult with the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc. to develop a plan to implement zero-emissions buses state-wide. Such plan shall include the technological, facility and financial arrangements needed for such a conversion of bus fleets as well as identifying specific locations for hydrogen refueling stations along state highways or at locations that could potentially be utilized by state fleets or other public
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ron Degraw Transit Collection 2397
    Ron Degraw Transit Collection 2397 This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on September 14, 2021. Description is written in: English. Describing Archives: A Content Standard Manuscripts and Archives PO Box 3630 Wilmington, Delaware 19807 [email protected] URL: http://www.hagley.org/library Ron Degraw Transit Collection 2397 Table of Contents Summary Information .................................................................................................................................... 3 Biographical Note .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Scope and Content ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information ............................................................................................................................ 5 Related Materials ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Controlled Access Headings .......................................................................................................................... 6 Collection Inventory ....................................................................................................................................... 6 SEPTA ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Properties Comparison
    Alternative Fuels Data Center Fuel Properties Comparison Compressed Liquefied Low Sulfur Gasoline/E10 Biodiesel Propane (LPG) Natural Gas Natural Gas Ethanol/E100 Methanol Hydrogen Electricity Diesel (CNG) (LNG) Chemical C4 to C12 and C8 to C25 Methyl esters of C3H8 (majority) CH4 (majority), CH4 same as CNG CH3CH2OH CH3OH H2 N/A Structure [1] Ethanol ≤ to C12 to C22 fatty acids and C4H10 C2H6 and inert with inert gasses 10% (minority) gases <0.5% (a) Fuel Material Crude Oil Crude Oil Fats and oils from A by-product of Underground Underground Corn, grains, or Natural gas, coal, Natural gas, Natural gas, coal, (feedstocks) sources such as petroleum reserves and reserves and agricultural waste or woody biomass methanol, and nuclear, wind, soybeans, waste refining or renewable renewable (cellulose) electrolysis of hydro, solar, and cooking oil, animal natural gas biogas biogas water small percentages fats, and rapeseed processing of geothermal and biomass Gasoline or 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 1.12 B100 1 gal = 0.74 GGE 1 lb. = 0.18 GGE 1 lb. = 0.19 GGE 1 gal = 0.67 GGE 1 gal = 0.50 GGE 1 lb. = 0.45 1 kWh = 0.030 Diesel Gallon GGE GGE 1 gal = 1.05 GGE 1 gal = 0.66 DGE 1 lb. = 0.16 DGE 1 lb. = 0.17 DGE 1 gal = 0.59 DGE 1 gal = 0.45 DGE GGE GGE Equivalent 1 gal = 0.88 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 0.93 DGE 1 lb. = 0.40 1 kWh = 0.027 (GGE or DGE) DGE DGE B20 DGE DGE 1 gal = 1.11 GGE 1 kg = 1 GGE 1 gal = 0.99 DGE 1 kg = 0.9 DGE Energy 1 gallon of 1 gallon of 1 gallon of B100 1 gallon of 5.66 lb., or 5.37 lb.
    [Show full text]
  • An Integrated Hydrogen Vision for California
    An Integrated Hydrogen Vision for California White Paper/Guidance Document Prepared with Support from the Steven and Michele Kirsch Foundation July 9, 2004 Lead Authors: Dr. Timothy Lipman Energy and Resources Group Inst. of Transportation Studies University of California – Berkeley and Davis Prof. Daniel Kammen Energy and Resources Group Goldman School of Public Policy University of California - Berkeley Assoc. Prof. Joan Ogden Environmental Science and Policy Inst. of Transportation Studies University of California - Davis Prof. Daniel Sperling Civil and Environmental Engineering Environmental Science and Policy Inst. of Transportation Studies University of California - Davis Additional Authors: Anthony Eggert, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis Prof. Peter Lehman, Schatz Energy Research Center, Humboldt State University Dr. Susan Shaheen, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley and UC Davis Dr. David Shearer, California Environmental Associates i This page left intentionally blank i An Integrated Hydrogen Vision for California Acknowledgments This project was funded by the Steven and Michele Kirsch Foundation with additional support from the UC Davis Hydrogen Pathways Program and the Energy Foundation. We are appreciative of the Kirsch Foundation’s timely support for this project. We thank (in alphabetical order) Mary Jean Burer, Dr. Charles Chamberlain, Gustavo Collantes, Rachel Finson, Roland Hwang, Jim Lee, Dr. Amory Lovins, Jason Mark, and Stefan Unnasch, and Jonathan Weinert for their insights and assistance as we conducted this project. We thank Hon. Mark DeSaulnier for his support and assistance, and more generally for championing clean air and mobility solutions for California. We further would like to specially acknowledge and thank Dr. Geoffrey Ballard for his visionary leadership in the field of hydrogen and fuel cells, and for his commitment to graduate education and thoughtful debate in this fascinating field.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Hydrogen Highway Fuel Cell Hybrid Bus and Fueling Infrastructure Technology Showcase
    Texas Hydrogen Highway Fuel Cell Hybrid Bus and Fueling Infrastructure Technology Showcase David Hitchcock Texas H2 Coalition June 10, 2010 This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise Project TV011 restricted information. 1 Overview Timeline Barriers • Technical Barriers Addressed – Lack of fuel cell vehicle performance and • Start: Sept. 1, 2008 durability data – Hydrogen storage End: Sept. 1, 2010 – Lack of hydrogen refueling infrastructure • performance and availability data 85% complete – Maintenance and training facilities • – Codes and standards • Partners – Interactions/collaborations • University of Texas at Austin Budget • Gas Technology Institute • Houston Advanced Research Center • Total Project Funding: – Project Lead $382,776 • Texas H2 Coalition – DOE share: 100% – Contractor share: 0% • Funding received: – FY09: $244,069 – FY10: $138,707 2 The 22‐ft fuel cell hybrid bus (E‐Bus) on its way to the Dallas‐Ft. Worth area for demonstration Gas Technology Institute University of Texas at Austin The hydrogen station is automated with on‐site hydrogen generation. The reformer, gas clean‐up, compression, and controls are on a skid that is fabricated prior to installation. 3 Relevance: Objectives • Objectives – To provide public outreach and education by showcasing the operation of a 22-foot fuel cell hybrid shuttle bus and hydrogen fueling infrastructure – To showcase operation of zero-emissions vehicle for potential transit applications – To advance commercialization of hydrogen- powered transit
    [Show full text]
  • Making Markets for Hydrogen Vehicles: Lessons from LPG
    Making Markets for Hydrogen Vehicles: Lessons from LPG Helen Hu and Richard Green Department of Economics and Institute for Energy Research and Policy University of Birmingham Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom Hu: [email protected] Green: [email protected] +44 121 415 8216 (corresponding author) Abstract The adoption of liquefied petroleum gas vehicles is strongly linked to the break-even distance at which they have the same costs as conventional cars, with very limited market penetration at break-even distances above 40,000 km. Hydrogen vehicles are predicted to have costs by 2030 that should give them a break-even distance of less than this critical level. It will be necessary to ensure that there are sufficient refuelling stations for hydrogen to be a convenient choice for drivers. While additional LPG stations have led to increases in vehicle numbers, and increases in vehicles have been followed by greater numbers of refuelling stations, these effects are too small to give self-sustaining growth. Supportive policies for both vehicles and refuelling stations will be required. 1. Introduction While hydrogen offers many advantages as an energy vector within a low-carbon energy system [1, 2, 3], developing markets for hydrogen vehicles is likely to be a challenge. Put bluntly, there is no point in buying a vehicle powered by hydrogen, unless there are sufficient convenient places to re-fuel it. Nor is there any point in providing a hydrogen refuelling station unless there are vehicles that will use the facility. What is the most effective way to get round this “chicken and egg” problem? Data from trials of hydrogen vehicles can provide information on driver behaviour and charging patterns, but extrapolating this to the development of a mass market may be difficult.
    [Show full text]
  • Prospects for Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Light Duty Vehicles
    Prospects for Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Light-Duty Vehicles An MIT Energy Initiative Symposium April 19, 2012 MIT Energy Initiative Symposium on Prospects for Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Light-Duty Vehicles | April 19, 2012 C Prospects for Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Light-Duty Vehicles An MIT Energy Initiative Symposium April 19, 2012 ABOUT THE REPORT Summary for Policy Makers The April 19, 2012, MIT Energy Initiative Symposium addressed Prospects for Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Light-Duty Vehicles. The symposium focused on natural gas, biofuels, and motor gasoline as fuels for light-duty vehicles (LDVs) with a time horizon of the next two to three decades. The important transportation alternatives of electric and hybrid vehicles (this was the subject of the 2010 MITEi Symposium1) and hydrogen/fuel-cell vehicles, a longer-term alternative, were not considered. There are three motivations for examining alternative transportation fuels for LDVs: (1) lower life cycle cost of transportation for the consumer, (2) reduction in the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of the transportation sector (an important contributor to total US GHG emissions), and (3) improved energy security resulting from greater use of domestic fuels and reduced liquid fuel imports. An underlying question is whether a flex-fuel/bi-fuel mandate for new LDVs would drive development of a robust alternative fuels market and infrastructure versus alternative fuel use requirements. Symposium participants agreed on these motivations. However, in this symposium in contrast to past symposiums, there was a striking lack of agreement about the direction to which the market might evolve, about the most promising technologies, and about desirable government action.
    [Show full text]
  • 90 Day Taxi Report May Through July 2019
    DATE: October 10, 2019 TO: SFMTA Board of Directors Malcolm Heinicke, Chair Gwyneth Borden, Vice Chair Cheryl Brinkman, Director Amanda Eaken, Director Steve Heminger, Director Cristina Rubke, Director Art Torres, Director THROUGH: Tom Maguire Interim Director of Transportation FROM: Kate Toran Director of Taxis and Accessible Services SUBJECT: Second Quarterly Report on Taxi Medallion Rules at San Francisco International Airport: May – July 2019 Introduction The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) is providing a regular quarterly update to the Board regarding the implementation of the new airport taxi rules, which imposed restrictions on the types of taxi medallions that are authorized to provide a taxicab trip originating at San Francisco International Airport (SFO or Airport). The first quarterly report provides background information and tracks the first quarter of implementation of the new SFO rules, February through April 2019. This second quarterly report tracks progress in meeting the policy goals, from the time period from May through July, comparing the three-month time period in 2018 “before” with the same three-month period in 2019 “after” the Airport rule changes. Comparing the same three-month period from year to year helps exclude any seasonal variation, and assures the comparison is for the same number of days in the quarter; both factors can significantly impact taxi ridership. One major continuing issue is with poor data quality sent by the taxicabs, aggregated by color scheme, and transmitted by their dispatch service and/or data provider. The transmittals contain a large amount of data that do not appear to be valid trip or activity records, and inconsistencies vary across different dispatch companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure for Fuel Cell Vehicles: a Status Update
    www.theicct.org BRIEFING OCTOBER 2017 Developing hydrogen fueling infrastructure for fuel cell vehicles: A status update This briefing provides a synthesis of information regarding the global development of hydrogen fueling infrastructure to power fuel cell vehicles. The compilation includes research on hydrogen infrastructure deployment, fuel pathways, and planning based on developments in the prominent fuel cell vehicle growth markets around the world. INTRODUCTION Governments around the world continue to seek the right mix of future vehicle technologies that will enable expanded personal mobility and freight transport with near-zero emissions. This move toward zero emissions is motivated by the simultaneous drivers of improving local air quality, protecting against increased climate change impacts, and shifting to local renewable fuel sources. Electricity-powered plug-in vehicles and hydrogen-powered fuel cell electric vehicles offer great potential to displace the inherently high emissions associated with the combustion of petroleum- based gasoline and diesel fuels. Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles offer a unique combination of features as a zero-emission alternative to conventional vehicles. Fuel cell powertrains, converting hydrogen to electric power to propel the vehicle, tend to be about twice as efficient as those on conventional vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are typically capable of long trips (i.e., over 500 kilometers or 300 miles) and a short refueling time that is comparable to conventional vehicles. Furthermore, fuel cell vehicles are expected to be less expensive than conventional vehicles in the long run. The Prepared by: Aaron Isenstadt and Nic Lutsey. BEIJING | BERLIN | BRUSSELS | SAN FRANCISCO | WASHINGTON ICCT BRIEFING diversity of fuel pathways to produce hydrogen allows for the use of lower-carbon, renewable, and nonimported sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Ct Transit Bus Schedule East Haven
    Ct Transit Bus Schedule East Haven Is Joab incentive or tragic after anaerobiotic Marlow caroused so exuberantly? Shawn criminalize his maxima predominating soakingly or yeomanly after Tudor pitapat and retreads natively, tearing and moonish. Greggory is songless and cop scant as nonparous Robb skite indistinctly and waived ineffaceably. Registration is fast and free. Service hours are usually the same as the local bus route. Thank you for helping! Stamford, Bridgeport, and New Haven, located along the coastal highways from the New York border to New London, then northward up the Connecticut River to Hartford. Moving to smaller buses would not reduce these costs and would involve substantial capital costs for the new buses. When I was applying, I applied to six schools: two a uncertain, two solid, and two safeties. Easy to follow charts and graphs make viewing all your stats a breeze. Union Station Shuttle is. Search Bar for CT. Choose to make form fields required or optional, use field validation, and customize all system messages. Sherman Ave, location in Hamden. Get access to detailed information for all your visitors. On the other hand, just keeping or turning traffic signals green for buses may be doable. The western boundaries of Connecticut have been subject to change over time. Points of interest include: Chester center, Goodspeed Opera House, Saybrook Road medical complexes, Middlesex Hospital, Middlesex Courthouse and downtown Middletown. Here are some simple options that can help you reach your destination on time. Note: Holidays are not necessarily observed and service may not be different from the usual for the day.
    [Show full text]
  • The Norwegian Hydrogen Highway
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Juelich Shared Electronic Resources HyNor – The Norwegian Hydrogen Highway B. Simonsen, A.M. Hansen This document appeared in Detlef Stolten, Thomas Grube (Eds.): 18th World Hydrogen Energy Conference 2010 - WHEC 2010 Parallel Sessions Book 6: Stationary Applications / Transportation Applications Proceedings of the WHEC, May 16.-21. 2010, Essen Schriften des Forschungszentrums Jülich / Energy & Environment, Vol. 78-6 Institute of Energy Research - Fuel Cells (IEF-3) Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Zentralbibliothek, Verlag, 2010 ISBN: 978-3-89336-656-9 Proceedings WHEC2010 241 HyNor – The Norwegian Hydrogen Highway Bjørn Simonsen, Lillestrøm Centre of Expertise, Norway Anne Marit Hansen, Statoil, Norway 1 Introduction Hydrogen is one of the most promising energy carriers which can make the transport sector emission-free. The challenges related to hydrogen as an energy carrier are however not only technical. Due to the nature and purpose of transport, a number of refueling points or hydrogen stations are needed for it to be attractive as a fuel. The cliché “chicken and egg”- situation is often used to describe the dilemma of implementing new fuels such as hydrogen. Without hydrogen stations where people can refuel the cars, it is not profitable to produce the few cars that will be needed. Without many customers asking for hydrogen fuel and very few customers actually using the existing stations, the operators of the station will not want to build more stations due to the economical loss it presents. Hydrogen has many years been looked upon as an alternative to conventional fuels, either because of energy security and/or environmental reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Fuel Cell Market Report, November 2010
    Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy 2009 FUEL CELL MARKET REPORT NOVEMBER 2010 Authors This report was written primarily by Bill Vincent of the Breakthrough Technologies Institute in Washington, DC, with significant assistance from Jennifer Gangi, Sandra Curtin, and Elizabeth Delmont. Acknowledgement This report was the result of hard work and valuable contributions from government staff and the fuel cell industry. The authors especially wish to thank Sunita Satyapal, Nancy Garland and the staff of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Fuel Cell Technologies Program for their support and guidance in the preparation of this report. The authors also wish to thank Robert Rose and Robert Wichert of the U.S. Fuel Cell Council, Lisa Callaghan-Jerram of Fuel Cell Today Consulting, Rachel Gelman of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Jennifer Gangi, Sandra Curtin, and Elizabeth Delmont from Fuel Cells 2000, and the many others who made this report possible. Table of Contents List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Financials......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Fuel Cells
    2016 FUEL CELLS SECTION 3.4 Fuel Cells Fuel cells efficiently convert diverse fuels directly into electricity without combustion, and they are key elements of a broad portfolio for building a competitive, secure, and sustainable clean energy economy. They offer a broad range of benefits, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions; reduced oil consumption; expanded use of renewable power (through the use of hydrogen derived from renewable resources as a transportation fuel as well as for energy storage and transmission); highly efficient energy conversion; fuel flexibility (use of diverse, domestic fuels, including hydrogen, natural gas, biogas, and methanol); reduced air pollution, criteria pollutants, water use; and highly reliable grid support. Fuel cells also have numerous advantages that make them appealing for end users, including quiet operation, low maintenance needs, and high reliability. Because of their broad applicability and diverse uses, fuel cells can address critical challenges in all energy sectors: commercial, residential, industrial, and transportation. The fuel cell industry had revenues of approximately $2.2 billion in 2014, an increase of almost $1 billion over revenues in 2013.1 The largest markets for fuel cells today are in stationary power, portable power, auxiliary power units, backup power, and material handling equipment. Approximately 155,000 fuel cells were shipped worldwide in the four-year period from 2010 through 2013, accounting for 510–583 MW of fuel cell capacity.2 In 2014 alone, more than 50,000 fuel cells accounting for over 180 MW of capacity were shipped.1 In transportation applications, manufacturers have begun to commercialize fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs). Hyundai and Toyota have recently introduced their FCEVs in the marketplace, and Honda is set to launch its new FCEV in the market in 2016.
    [Show full text]